It's literally in their FAQ: https://www.getmonero.org/get-started/faq/

Anyone curious about how Monero is implemented would immediately understand why it's a bad idea to use remote nodes.

>What is the difference between a lightweight and a normal wallet?

>For a lightweight wallet, you give your view key to a node, who scans the blockchain and looks for incoming transactions to your account on your behalf. This node will know when you receive money, but it will not know how much you receive, who you received it from, or who you are sending money to. Depending on your wallet software, you may be able to use a node you control to avoid privacy leaks. For more privacy, use a normal wallet, which can be used with your own node.

I really hate that the desktop app unlinks after a relatively short period of time. I rarely use Signal, so few of my friends are there, so I have to relink the desktop app almost every time I open it. I wouldn't mind scanning a qr code every now and then, but then the history refuses to sync because security. So far I haven't find how to change it.

The Android app is stable enough, but the UX of having to look at the phone while typing a reply on a normal keyboard is annoying. This is why I prefer Telegram every time.

I've got Signal on 2 computers, 1 of which I only run it occasionally. I've never had to reconnect it.

I'm not sure what's going on for you, but it seems really abnormal.

It automatically unlinks the desktop app if you don't open it for 30 days.

There is now at least a reminder on the phone app that will prompt you a few days before one of your desktop apps is about to get unlinked.

I wouldn't call 30 days "a short period of time"...If I hadn't used it for 30days, I'd uninstall it.

Which is pretty odd as WhatsApp allegedly uses the very same E2E encryption and has no problem implementing a web client. I really don't see the point of Electron if it doesn't allow you to provide a web client.

> Which is pretty odd

I have always assumed no Signal web client was a choice made to improve security.

It’s easier to make cross platform?

”I would feel pretty silly if my solution uses its own camera. So I'll be avoiding that.”

From the GitHub link.

Yeah but that approach using "sweeps" doesn't seem to be working. It's possible it actually requires a camera to do it reliably well.

I’ve heard of approaches using pulsed IR along with a Mk.1 Human Eyeball to detect the incident reflections, sometimes with the assistance of a filter. Glasses seem like a good form factor for that kind of thing.

Of course, the detecting person’s anti-camera glasses may well light up on the surveiller’s recording, too…

The solution to this (smart glass privacy debate) is Apple releasing smart glasses that automatically anonymize anyone in your photos/videos who isn’t a friend or family member with you at the time (it could be done automatically as Apple knows your friends/family members' faces already). All else appear as random faces, completely removed, a blurred out crowd to whatever privacy config options they offer and you choose.

Not a creep here and use my Meta glasses to record my normal non-creepy life and life experiences. They are really convenient and useful (just suck cause they break easily either from software updates to water splashes)!

This isn't a solution, they would still have the data. Companies can't be trusted, they'll do what is more convenient for them, we need to remove the problem at the root by not allowing people to take pictures/videos if not permitted.

Indeed, this solution is in some way even worse.

It teaches people to trust "Currently NonEvil Company™" to do the good thing.

First, and obvious problem is that this "trains" us to rely on brands to protect us. And to keep doing this. Companies may have different interests than their consumers. Ideally and sometimes these interests are aligned. But nothing guarantees this remains so. Companies will "Become evil", if only because they are sometimes legally forced to by governments or shareholders.

Second, is that this teaches people not to be responsible but to leave that to companies or technology. Which works if e.g. Apple and Meta are the only providers. But falls apart the moment Focebook glasses, Apelle Gear or Rang Doorbell is available on temu. And becomes worse when HP, Dell, Samsung, IBM and other legitimate producers start competing in the space. We've now been trained that what the first companies did was "The Good Thing", but lack the social structure, laws, or even common sense to manage a world in which this self-constraint of the companies no longer applies.

Apple is the privacy company already .. that's their brand and a brand that the public trusts.

Overall why are we not up in arms about all the video cameras that record in all cities everyday which companies like Clearview and others have our public images in their databases yet we are up in arms about smart glasses?

THis is a solution to this public debate and Apple hasnt released their glasses yet and they are a privacy company and heavily market themselves as such. As the poster notes smart glasses adoption is rising and will only continue to do so... so this debate in time will continue to fade into the background as there is no same amount of debate about all the cameras in cities that are already recording us. With that in mind the smart glass privacy debate is an odd one to me where corporations are already recording us in these same public places.

> Apple is the privacy company already .. that's their brand and a brand that the public trusts.

...for now. What happens if they end up with a future CEO who is more like Zuck?

lol overall this argument is silly the genie is out the bottle and in five to ten years smart glasses are the norm. All you laggards will be wearing them too and or many close to you will be wearing them. Go ahead and downvote me but in five to ten years you know i am right ;)

Reminds me of my 24 year old niece in which her and her friends hate chatGPT/AI. Hippies fighting technological progress futilely. Like the iPhone haters of 2007 to 2010!

I've struggled with this in many public spaces even without having a camera on my glasses. Should I feel guilty that some kids are incidentally in my photos when my kids are on the playground when I take a photo of them? Should I never take photos in public because other unwilling people might be included unless I've explicitly asked them?

As noted Apple already knows your friends' and familys' faces... why are people not up in arms about this fact already? It's been close to a decade or more they have done this.

Also the debate is around a lot of people not wanting to be recorded without permission in public via glasses (yet they are complacent about all the video cameras recording us now.. i dont get it) so with Apple marketing smart glasses with a solution to this debate and millions buying their smart privacy glasses the market forces all others to follow suit (offer smart privacy glass features too).

Going by data, most likely a path with prior success.

Equally there are security concerns having sites inside the US.

I'd rather have it somewhere stable like Switzerland

I suspect the only reason this hasn't been used as part of "deal leverage" is because the US regime doesn't know of its existence

You can't possibly have the same recommendation for all geographies. Florida and Scotland have somewhat different level of UVB especially throughout the winter, come on.

I think we can clear the backlog real quick if we use LLM-As-A-Judge =)

Perhaps they just don't care enough? I got unsupervised internet access when I was 10 and I don't see what's wrong with that. Similarly, video games didn't make me a psycho.

I also had unsupervised internet as a kid in the 2000s, but the internet is a very different place now with social media, algorithmic feeds, and content that has been carefully designed by bad actors to be as addictive and manipulative as possible. AI is surely not helping so far. I think it must be very difficult to grow up immersed in that environment.

If in a few more years, “video games” evolve into hyper realistic VR worlds with LLM-powered NPCs that act like real people, also designed to maximize engagement, we might need to revisit the risks of exposing kids to that as well.

Do you also support a blanket ban of CCTV in public spaces? I am pretty sure that the bank had a camera in the ATM recording a public pavement 24/7 and nobody bats an eye.

> Do you also support a blanket ban of CCTV in public spaces?

I'm not sure I support anything. I'm just pointing out that there is a path available if you don't just assume that you should be allowed to take video.

But it wouldn't bother me at all to have, say, a rule that you couldn't have a surveillance camera covering any space you didn't own, and furthermore that if you had a camera covering a space that you did own that was open to the public, and recordings would be deleted after say 24 hours unless there was special justification to keep a specific one.

Many people are actually quite uncomfortable with the prevalence of video surveillance, in fact.

However, there are significant differences: 1. The camera is in a fixed position, 2. The footage is not typically shared let alone published online.

It's obvious, but the problem was that enough people would die in the process for people to be worried. Similarly, if the current AI will be able to replace 99% of devs in 5-10 years (or even worse, most white collar jobs) and flatten out there without becoming a godlike AGI, it will still have enormous implications for the economy.